adamjedgar

So the question remains...if in the Old Testament Sanctuary, according to some theories on this, the Alter of Incense was in fact in the MHP, how then did the priests access it to keep it "stoked" without being killed by the glory of God? They were only allowed into MHP one day per year on day of Atonement!

Hi Michael, unfortunately, you cannot interchange the tanslation of Golden Censor with Alter of incense and there is a good reason why...it does not resolve the problem! Leviticus 16 2And the LORD said to Moses: “Tell your brother Aaron not to enter freely into the Most Holy Placea behind the veil in front of the mercy seatb on the ark, or else he will die, because I appear in the cloud above the mercy seat. A High Priest could only enter the MHP on the day of Atonement and the incense from the alter had to be burning continuously throughout the year. He had to ensure that the incense was placed on the fire before the Lord so that it covers the mercy seat above the Testimony...SO THAT HE WILL NOT DIE. Notice in Leviticus 16:11-13 that the High Priest moves inside the Veil after he puts the fire in his censor Leviticus 16:11When Aaron presents the bull for his sin offering and makes atonement for himself and his household, he is to slaughter the bull for his own sin offering. 12Then he must take a censer full of burning coals from the altar before the LORD, and two handfuls of finely ground fragrant incense, and take them inside the veil. 13He is to put the incense on the fire before the LORD, and the cloud of incense will cover the mercy seat above the Testimony,d so that he will not die. Ok so here is the dilemma, either: 1. centuries of accepted imagery showing the location of the Alter of Incense in the Holy Place of the Tabernacle are wrong or, 2. If the Alter was in fact in the MHP, then how on earth did Aaron manage to get fire for his golden censor from the alter of incense, when he would have needed to physically enter the MHP to do this...in addition to priests needing to regularly attend to the Alter throughout any given week to "stoke" the burning coals on it! How could Aaron possibly do this without dying from the glory of God shining from the mercy seat above the Testimony contained inside the Ark? This is very problematic, i cannot see how its possible for the above two issues to even be reconciled without being circular in that neither resolves the dilemma without producing a new one! If we say option 1 above is correct, then why is the alter not in the HP in Hebrews 9? (its very clearly either not mentioned at all, or placed in the MHP (which i believe is the incorrect translation of golden censor btw) If we say option 2 above that Hebrews 9 is correct, then two problems arise: 1. conflicts with the model recorded by moses, and 2. cannot possibly resolve Leviticus 16:11-13 in that the priests had to maintain the fire throughout the entire year on a weekly basis...this would require entering the MHP almost daily to stoke the fire on it thus exposing themselves to the glory of God which would kill them outside of the Day of Atonement ritual! I have a theory that i believe resolves the problem... Why did the writer of Hebrews (which was not the apostle Paul btw although he may have had input into its writing) seem to illustrate the heavenly sanctuary wrongly compared with the Exodus and Leviticus models? Here is the key to my theory... Matthew 27:50&51 50When Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, He yielded up His spirit. 51At that moment the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. My theory is, once Jesus died, the veil that separates us from the father on the throne (the mercy seat illustrated by the earthly type...ie the Ark of the covenant), was now removed...we could now go boldy before the throne of the father as redeemed persons and receive Gods mercy. If you recall what happened to Aarons 2 sons (nadab and abihu) when they presented strange fire before the Lord? They got drunk and went "boldly" before the throne and were immediately struck down dying where they stood. The Lord showed no mercy to these men because they were not righteous in his sight nor had any atonement been made for their sins prior to entering into his presence. Theres was an act of disobedience and in this case this rule for priests entering MHP was also for their own protection i think... 3Then Moses said to Aaron, “This is what the LORD meant when He said: ‘To those who come near Me I will show My holiness, and in the sight of all the people I will reveal My glory.’ ” The priests were not even allowed to touch their bodies when they removed them from the tabernacle...they were carried out only by their clothing! Unlike Nadab and Abihu on the other hand, after Jesus gave his life for us on the cross, those who "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" now clothed in the righteousness of Christ and may now present ourselves boldly before the throne... Hebrews 4:16Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. the veil that separates us from the glory of God is no longer needed! The tabernacle described in Hebrews is of the heavenly antitype ( from which the earthly is a copy). When the curtain in the earthly was ripped in two, that symoblises the redemption of mankind back to God in that sin no more separates us from the father. (i might have to refine the wording here but the idea i am sure my basic theory here is close to the mark)

You need to research scholarly writings on them...it's not my conclusion, I read a lot of academics works I guess. Also, you are trying to interpret writings of Revelation using literal methods....the book of Revelation is not a narrative, it contains large amounts of complex imagery ...you can't read it the way you are...that is why you think the witnesses are persons when scholars know they are not.

One of the most successful evangelists to Jehovah's Witnesses was a Seventh Day Adventist minister by the name of pastor Bruce Price. He converted more than 200 of them. Bruce was born out of a family with close ties to the JW movement...his mother had converted to SDA after comparing the teachings of the two denominations. He has written about his techniques...I will find that resource and post it. He stated that JW's are being lost with a Bible in their hands...he had a genuine passion for giving them the gospel Here is a link JW to SDA » Jehovah's Witness to Seventh-day Adventist (jw2sda.org) "I was born shortly after my parents became Adventists. As I grew up I became interested to discover why my mother loved the Witnesses so much yet she did not join them. In later years she would say to me, “Bruce, they are wonderful people, if only we could help them to see the greater truths of the Bible!” However, as time went on Effie (pastor Price's Mother) began to get confused with Watchtower teachings. The “truths” presented in the books written by the original president of the Society, Pastor Charles Taze Russell were now being contradicted by the “truths” in the publications of the new President, Judge Rutherford. There were prophecies made by the Watchtower Society had not come to pass. Teachings taught as truth for decades were being altered and discarded. http://jw2sda.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/beth-sarim_small.jpgNow in 1929 a house called, “Beth Sarim” had been built in San Diego, California, USA, for the Princes who had failed to be resurrected as predicted for 1925. In the past fifty years it has been my privilege to have been personally involved in the baptism of well over 200 people from the teachings of the Watchtower Society into the Seventh-day Adventist church. In 1971, Bruce was called to departmental work, which included teaching pastors and church members how to win souls for Christ. With a special burden to help Jehovah’s Witnesses, he wrote the first edition of his book, “Our Friends: the Jehovah’s Witnesses” As 1975 approached he also began a paper entitled, “Witness – witnessing to Witnesses” to warn his Witness friends that the 1975 date would pass like the many other false prophecies made by the Watchtower Society. This paper was continued for a number of years and recorded the tragic aftermath of the 1975 date failure. Some of this information he included in later editions of “Our Friends: the Jehovah’s Witnesses”. to directly answer a statement made on page one of this thread...Jehovahs Witnesses have a major doctrine issue that many SDA's believes prevents them from gaining salvation... Bruce Price illustrates this Nearly all Jehovah’s Witnesses today believe that they should not be “born again”. (With their present membership around 6,000,000, less than 9,000 claim to be “born again”.) This means they do not partake of the emblems of the bread and wine at their Memorial service each year. However the Bible teaches in John 3:3,5 that if a person is not “born again” they can not enter into God’s kingdom (whether it is in heaven or on the earth!). Furthermore, if one does not “eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood” John 6:54 they will not be resurrected and/or have everlasting life. Theirs is a serious plight. We must help them

you guys do realise the "two witnesses" are the old and new testaments of the bible right?

Exodus 30:1You are also to make an altar of acacia wood for the burning of incense.6Place the altar in front of the veil that is before the ark of the Testimony. Hebrews 9:2A tabernacle was prepared. In its first room were the lampstand, the table, and the consecrated bread.b This was called the Holy Place. Why does the alter of incense for the Heavenly Sanctuary not appear to be located in the Holy Place by the writer of Hebrews and is this of any significance considering the lamb of God, who was without sin, had now become High Priest? We find a significant difference in explanation between the KJV and other versions here too...other versions have interpreted the Golden Censor as being the Alter. This is not the case with the KJV (i think the KJV is the correct translation here). In any case, here is my theory, After Jesus crucifixion, the incense (which normally flowed into the Most Holy Place from the Alter of Incense) was no longer needed to protect our High Priest from death of the glory of God on the mercy seat. Jesus had already redeemed us, he paid the price for sin, he cant die twice! Second, I follow the Trinitarian view that Jesus is God, he cant be killed by his own Glory! Therefore, the incense from the alter is no longer needed for the same purpose as in the Old testament sanctuary. Also Rev 8 makes an interesting observation... 3And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. 4And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand. At this point in time, even though he approaches the alter, the Angel in Revelation does not get his incense from the Alter...it is given to him (placed in His censor) and he then offers the prayers of the saints on the Alter! I feel that the key to all of this is Matthew 27: 50Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. 51And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; The heavenly sanctuary is an antitype of the earthly. The earthly temple veil was torn in two at Jesus death and I think this is significant in explaining Hebrews 9:2&3

So let me just understand this correctly...you have gone on a works based fast to try to find healing for family health issues? I'm not sure that's biblical. Are they fasting? Prayer might be the better option. If your not eating and it's causing you immediate health problems, perhaps you have your answer to the fasting idea?

I believe that at the rapture absolutely the Holy Spirit is removed from the earth...Satan, his angels and the dead wicked are all that remain...what is the Holy spirit's purpose? It certainly isn't with those whom probations door has closed. They are eternally lost at that point. Their fates are sealed and they await the carrying out of their sentence...it's done and dusted for them...no further redemption is possible.

I don't see islam working. The final power has to come out of the iron kingdom...it's clear from history that Rome followed Greece. This is an historically proven fact...it must be the correct interpretation. So, that means the little horn must rise out of the Roman Empire to fit the imagery in the vision A quick observation...an antichrist is a "wolf in sheep's clothing"...a pretender. Islam does not pretend to be Christian...they do not believe in Jesus as Mighty God. Islam I think see their own version of the Abrahamic narrative.. their own version of the chosen people. There is no trickery going on there...it's plainly obvious and not a particularly good effort at deceiving using antichrist (imho). So this leaves a dilemma...how would a "wolf in sheep's clothing" come out of the Roman Empire? There is an important characteristic about Greece and particularly Rome, they realised that in order to maintain control, both state and religion were vital...this is how the Papacy got its power, the combining of a pagan state with the christian church...what better way to achieve the "wolf in sheep's clothing" goals than to corrupt the messiahs own message from within his own group of followers...the future Judaces! If we look back in history, we hear the term "dark ages". What happened during this time and who was at the helm? Terrible oppression and persecution at the hands of "the church" with the power and blessing of the state...so much so, the pope was like God on earth...he ruled his roost and influenced monarchies everywhere...just look at the crusades! Heretics were killed by the hundreds, thousands...some say millions died at the hand of religious zealots. This sort of record fits the prophetic writings I think better than Islam...the wolf in sheep's clothing came from Christianity itself! Many churches claim the "wolf in sheep's clothing" to be manifested through the Roman Catholic Church. I don't like to point the finger at denominations...I would really prefer a different interpretation...but I honestly think history is against me on this one.

Hi, I am not a psychologist...i have no expertise in this area. My only claim to any kind of education is that i was a high school teacher for 4 years or so. I have no predefined purpose for asking, however, I am wondering... 1. what words, phrases, images appear in your mind when you have these panic attacks in groups/crowds? 2. what physical sensations do you experience (sight, hearing, touch, smell etc)

"Rome was not an empire until after Greece"...your statement there that Rome was long dead is historically false. No historian I know of agrees with that statement. You have your history wrong. Second, the Seluecid empire was a GREEK empire...it is not a unique entity. If you read your history you will quickly realise that to be true, however, for the sake of this comment i will post reference for this... The Seleucid Empire was founded by Seleucus I Nicator, following the division of the Macedonian Empire that existed previously, which had been founded by Alexander the Great. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seleucid_Empire Now your statement that Rome is not mentioned is also fundamentally flawed...we know that these kingdoms are true by more than just the words (Medo-Persia or Greece...because Babylon is also not directly named...only that the man, "Nebuchadnezzar himself", is the head of Gold). The reasons that almost all scholars know for certain that Rome is the fourth kingdom are because: 1. the most obvious is world history of course (Rome is absolutely the next world empire after Greece) 2. The Romans deified Alexander the Great...exactly as prophesied they would (roman emporers visited his grave, pompey attempted to style himself after Alexander even to the point of obtaining the identical method of dress, Romans followed his style of military tactics etc 3. The kingdoms very much followed the trend of the value vs strength of the metals associated with the statue in Daniel 2 (even down to the kingdoms of mixed iron and clay). You see history tells us that Babylon was an exceedingly rich kingdom...the city shone like gold, it was a glorious city to behold, we also know that Rome was absolutely a kingdom of Iron exactly as shown in the statue. Strangely enough, Rome struggled with its financing for most of its time in power...contrasting the riches of the Babylonian empire. 4. when we also compare the statue in Daniel 2 with further revelation given to Daniel in chapters 7 and 8 etc, it is very clear what kingdoms are being represented in Daniel 2. Clearly the fourth is 100% Rome. It might pay for you to move across into new testament study in parallel with Daniel 2 so that you dont get led up the garden path with the statement, Rome isnt mentioned in Daniel 2. That is the same line of thinking that JW's use to say "show me the word trinity in the bible"! Its a deeply flawed argument.

Charlie, I have managed to get in touch with and talk with Dad about your previous statement about Daniel 2:44. I have a question... In verse 32-35, the statue appears to me to be complete and free standing. 32The head of the statue was pure gold, its chest and arms were silver, its belly and thighs were bronze, 33its legs were iron, and its feet were part iron and part clay. the stone comes down and strikes this "complete" statue and shatters it such that the wind carries all of the crushed dust away... 35Then the iron, clay, bronze, silver, and gold were shattered and became like chaff on the threshing floor in summer. The wind carried them away, and not a trace of them could be found. We know that the description of the iron and potters clay is illustrating divided kingdoms...some being strong and others weak. This cannot be the Roman empire at the time of Jesus incarnation...it was an empirical dictatorship for hundreds of years after the death of Jesus. If the statue is complete prior to the stone (which is obviously Christ) hitting and destroying it, how do you reconcile the division of the feet being part iron and part clay did not happen until well after that time period in history?

You are right, "the big one is love" John 14:15 If you LOVE me, you will KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS!

hmmm, i should think that after reading 1 Samuel 28 and 29, it seems to me that God had completely forsaken Saul due to his persistent rejection of Gods commands. To add to this, Saul then went to a witch and asked her to divine up the spirit of Samuel. Does this appear like the behaviour of one whom is likely to obtain salvation considering one of King Sauls last acts breached the first two commandments...he fell down and worshipped the spirit that was divined by the witch! This appears to be offtopic from the two covenants

No one was ever saved by the law...we are not saved by keeping the law, we cannot keep the law perfectly, nor can we pay the price for others who have sinned who chose not to keep the law. The bible says because one man sinned (Adam) we are all condemned! (Romans 5:12 i think) Rom5:12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. In my earlier post, I simply quoted a large number of texts that very specifically all say exactly the same thing (John 14:21, John 14:23, John 15:10, 1 John 2:3, 1 John 5:3, 2 John 1:16)...they are irrefutably identical in meaning and support exactly what is stated in John 14:15. Not a single one of them is even taken out of context! BTW, all of the texts (John 14:21, John 14:23, John 15:10, 1 John 2:3, 1 John 5:3, 2 John 1:16) are concordance study links to the text below John 14:15...so they are scholarly links from researchers on biblehub.com not my own! John 14:15 15If you love Me, you will keepe My commandments. I am not attempting to place my own interpretation on anything the text says. (you can use this template and then highlight errors in your reply) "if you love me" - who are we to love? Is this not Jesus/Mighty God? "you" - who is the you here? Is this not Jesus followers "keep my commandments?" is not this phrase quite self explanatory? Do you disagree that this means keep the 10 commandments? A google search tells me that commandments are Gods 10 commandments (i can post dozens of google search results for commandments that prove this if you want) So based on a very very simple and self explanatory breakdown of Jesus statement in John 14:15, very clearly, as supported by all of the other texts I also posted; To love God is to keep his commandments. His commandments are the moral law of love. As i said before, the wages of sin was death before sin even entered this world. I have already irrefutably proven that by quoting Genesis 2:16 16And the LORD God commanded him, “You may eat freely from every tree of the garden, 17but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die.” God made this statement to Adam immediately after he placed him in the middle of the Garden of Eden. Note the 5th word in verse 16 God "COMMANDED" him. If as you say, the law was only instituted because of sin, how do you explain Genesis 2:16?

May i just enlighten you a tiny bit...perhaps you might do well to go back a few chapters in the book of daniel to the original statue...Chapter 2. That is where most definately you will see the four kingdoms: (i have numbered them from 1-4 just to make it easy for those who have trouble counting) 1. babylon - verse 37 2. medo-persia - verse 39, first half 3. greece - verse 39, second half 4. rome - verse 40 the mixed or divided kingdoms are the feet of iron and clay...verse 41 Now just to help with the understanding of the claim the name "rome" isnt mentioned...i would urge you to use some common sense here and read your history (as even secular history agrees with the bible on the nations that ruled the world after Babylon). It is a straw man argument to claim Rome isnt mentioned!

you realise that this is a "re-creation" of just the city entry dont you. It is not the real city fully rebuilt. This image is outside the archaeological dig which has exposed some of the ruins of the old city.

I can disapprove that with a single text...John 14:15 “If you love me, keep my commands.

So no one here who is of the negative against this topic keeps any commandments? You just live by the spirit right? Which spirit are you being led by and how do you know...by what moral compass are you testing the spirit guidance you apparently are receiving? How do you read all of the following texts? (Take particular notice of the last one below) John 14:21 Whoever has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me. The one who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and reveal Myself to him." John 14:23 Jesus replied, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. John 15:10 If you keep My commandments, you will remain in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and remain in His love. 1 John 2:3 By this we can be sure that we have come to know Him: if we keep His commandments. 1 John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome, 2 John 1:6 And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the very commandment you have heard from the beginning, that you must walk in love

yes that is of course true, however, the point is...why did God choose to associate the city of Babylon (or its name) with the antichrist if, as some denominations claim, the little horn arises from Rome? One would expect that the city of choice used in the book of Revelation would be Rome...but its not. Clearly Babylon is important and we now know why! The interesting thing about Babylon, it was also prophesied that this city would be punished as a result of the captivity of the Israelites.

I also found this description from a google search (not sure of the denomination). It provides an very interesting take on why the book of Revelation joins the city of Babylon with the little horn (whom we normally associate with Rome...a long way from Babylon!) So, when the ram and the he-goat stand before each other we have ponderosity verses agility and that was exactly the case when Alexander came with his forces across the Hellespont and attacked Darius and after three battles, one at Granicus, one at Issus, and then the last at Arbela (also called by other names.) Alexander became the ruler of the world. Alexander pushed on toward the east and even went as far as India, but finally his armies became tired. He came back to Babylon and established his empire there or headquarters there, I should say, which incidentally is of significance for biblical prophecy because in the Book of Revelation, Babylon again will be one of the important features of the last days, and this antichrist is identified with Babylon. But anyway he established his kingdom, his headquarters in Babylon and thereafter a short time just after he had come to world dominion he expired from marsh fever, and probably also dissipation. Alexander was one of the greatest of the world emperors, not only a many of tremendous energy, but also a man of tremendous intelligence. Unusual for world emperors and unusual for Presidents in these days as well. https://sljinstitute.net/the-prophets/daniel/the-interpretation-of-the-ram-and-he-goat-vision/ The significance of Alexander establishing his headquaters in Babylon...That was the very place where the statue of daniel 2 has its origins!

Melbourne Victoria (well actually i live about 15min west of Tullamarine airport actually) I think i have resolved my puzzle about the changing of the predatory animals in Daniel 7 to prey animals in Daniel 8. If we look at the change from the grand statue of Daniel 2 to the beasts in Daniel 7, the explanation for this change is very very simple. The grand awesome statue is what man sees... The predatory beasts coming up out of the sea are what God sees. So if we then look forward to the Daniel 8 description of the prey animals (Ram and Goat), I think this has parallels in the antichrist in that he pretends to be a prey animal and appears this way to future mankind, but is in fact a beast (what God seas in Daniel 7)!

you have to go to Daniel 2 to get the 4 kingdoms that are to follow. In Daniel 2 they are as follows: 1. Babylon 2. Medo-persia 3. Greece (the first mention of the Little Horn, however, does not have eyes or mouth) 4. Rome (pagan, then papal. Here the little horn has eyes and a mouth and speaks out against the most high) The other prophecies in Daniel follow the outline setout in Daniel 2. In Daniel 7 we see a change in the way in which the future kingdoms are illustrated...they are now individual/unique beasts rather than metals/clay kingdoms forming a statue. Daniel 8 we see a focus/zooming in of the Greek kingdom and the idea of the little horn starts here. What i find really interesting is that in the vision of Daniel 7, we have bear and leopard. However, Daniel 8 exchanges the beasts of medo-persia (bear) and greece (leopard) for a ram and a goat. Also note that both of these are animals with horns. I find this change puzzling. Its probable that this is to illustrate that the idea of the little horn starts much earlier than papal Rome and i tend to agree with that as it does seem to fit with the change in the type of animals found in Daniel 8. Another significant or interesting observation about the two animals in Daniel 8, unlike the predatory bear and leopard in Daniel 7 (1st year of Belshazzar), in Daniel 8 (3rd year of Belshazzar) they are both prey animals (ram and goat). That is surely an important revelation given to Daniel 2 years later?

Can you provide me with a Dropbox/Google drive/OneDrive link to your writings on this so I can download a copy? I would really like to read your position on this in depth. (Otherwise I can enable an account on my webserver linked with a WordPress website that you could upload it to as an article.

ok so i think i am starting to follow you now... 44In the days of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will shatter all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, but will itself stand forever. So the key that you are using is 1. "in the days of those kings" 2. God will setup a kingdom that will never be destroyed so the incarnation of Jesus is the commencement of your position because that even falls within the days of the 4th kingdom of Daniel 2. This is a really interesting perspective and i think i am following you now. I have a question though, isnt this the same position that the Jews for centuries had and mistakenly assumed this meant the messiah was come to defeat the Romans and setup an earthly kingdom. I realise that the answer to this question could be that the metaphor was taken literally and it was a heavenly kingdom. The issue i have with this is that one would be forced to deny AD 70 in order to defeat my question and prevent the literal interpretation of the Jewish position. Also, if we then go for the heavenly kingdom, how do we then reconcile that its quite clear that God is not setting up his heavenly kingdom until after the persecution of the saints according to the timeline in the book of Revelation (particularly in light of the signs we are given such as dark days, stars falling from heaven etc).